November 27, 2010

The NYT reports on an Oregon teenager's attempt to blow up fake explosives — given him by the FBI — that he thought were real. According to the FBI, he wanted to kill everyone who showed up for a Christmas tree lighting in Portland.

Mohamed Osman Mohamud, 19, was arrested at 5:40 p.m. Friday just after he dialed a cell phone that he thought would set off the blast but instead brought federal agents and police swooping down on him.

Yelling "Allahu Akbar!" — Arabic for "God is great!" — Mohamud tried to kick agents and police after he was taken into custody, according to prosecutors....

[T]he sting operation began in June after an undercover agent learned that Mohamud had been in regular e-mail contact with an "unindicted associate" in Pakistan's northwest, a frontier region where al-Qaida and Afghanistan's Taliban insurgents are strong....

ADDED: I already had the tag "Christmas bomber," so I used that again. There's a new spin on the "War on Christmas."

Nineteen years old. I'm not worried about people like Mohamed Osman Mohamud. He's so fucking stupid that he can't even make a bomb on his own. The FBI has to make a bomb for him. No, the real threat is that he's a Muslim and he's in this country. What worries me, is the hundreds of thousand of Muslims in this country who think just like this motherfucker. There are indications in this report that looks like the FBI is profiling. Let's step up the profiling and the scrutiny that is needed to stop these Islamic bombers.

An undercover agent met with him a month later in Portland, where they "discussed violent jihad," according to the court documents.

An example of the importance of good direct human intelligence, separate from all the great technological toys. And the way you get that intelligence is by having agents or contacts who are Muslims. Shows the folly of stereotyping all of them as the enemy.

Where did you get the information that the agent was Muslim, somefeller?

Either he was one or could pass for one if he could get Mohamud to convincingly "discuss violent jihad" with him. I doubt Mohamud would trust someone who didn't look and sound the part. Either way, you don't get to infiltrate these sorts of groups without having people on your team who can fit the part. Profiling is a necessary part of the arsenal of the FBI and other trained professionals in these matters, but there's a big difference between that and the generalized suspicion and loathing of most or all Muslims that one commonly hears from some quarters.

The FBI would seem to be profiling IP addresses: after an undercover agent learned that Mohamud had been in regular e-mail contact with an "unindicted associate" ...in a frontier region where al-Qaida and Afghanistan's Taliban insurgents are strong.

shouldn't the FBI be investigating 3-year-old girls, 89-year old ladies, and Catholic nuns?

If any of these were exchanging emails (or texts, I suppose) with residents of an al-Qaida stronghold, I expect the FBI would.

The plot was created by the FBI. This idiot couldn't, didn't have the knowedge, wasn't able to put a bomb together.

This is the second case of its type I've heard of. The idiot had the will and capacity to plant and set off a bomb; all he lacked was a connection to a bomb maker, which the FBI supplied. Should we let the guy wander freely until he actually hooks up with a competent bomb maker?

I think the agent would have to be convincingly Muslim to get Mohamud's trust, and we have Muslim FBI agents who can do that. Once again, don't treat all of them as the enemy.

What group was infiltrated? Sounds to me the only one infiltrated in this case was this idiot.

I was speaking generically, namely about the ability to infiltrate Islamic fundamentalist / jihadist groups. And while this guy may not have been planning his plot with others, he was apparently in contact with like-minded people overseas, at the very least.

remember the feel good stories of the Somali refugees fleeing their ravaged homeland to the US? How ignorant were we to let in this jihadi scum? And we are still doing it! I have no sympathy for any muslims living in those hell holes of their own making, and we shouldn't be importing more into the US.

(The Crypto Jew)Tim McVeigh. The FBI should profile everyone who ever read the Turner Diaries or who has gone to a gun show.

Well IF you could show that 90% of the terrorism came from readers of this work I’d agree…gee it’s odd, I’m seeing a common thread, but seemingly it’s being ignored…Plus, HIS E-MAILS WERE READ!?!?! !!Oh NOES ELEVENTY!!!! FASCISM IS HERE! DOWN WITH BOOSH, oh wait it’s Obama well then it’s OK.

Mohamed Osman Mohamudi think it is funny that his last name is just a variation on his first. how hard up for a name do you have to be that you give your kind your surname as his given name.althauz althouse.leon

Cuz if you can find just one white American who committed a terrorist act then I guess we should have no reason to look askance at muslims committing terrorism against us, even though 99.9% of the terrorist acts committed against us for the last forty years has been by muslims.

Lefties are happy to trot out statistics and probabilities to try to scare us into trillion-dollar changes to prevent "global warming", demonizing those who question the evidence as "deniers", but when the terrorism committed against us is unquestionably committed 99% of the time by muslims, suddenly the existence of one outlier (Tim McVeigh) means we should not consider muslims to be the problem.

Is it that threatening to your worldview to concede that this really is a problem with muslims, and not with white Americans?

Why was it necessary for the Feds to give this nut a fake bomb before they could arrest him? Sounds like the wanted a big, splashy media event before taking him, rather than quietly busting him for conspiracy.

As others have mentioned, how they found him sounds like the kind of stuff the Gray Lady disapproved of and exposed when Dubya was in. Of course, if it makes The Zero look good, they're all for it.

I wish we had a defense attorney who would comment on this. Or any attorney for that matter. Something like entrapment seems to have happened. Had the FBI not contacted him, and then given him a bomb, what would this Muslim have done without the direct involvment of federal authorities?

FLS, I see college students of all purported disciplines show up at my wife's State University in dire need of remedial education, which they get. Roughly half are foreign-born/raised. And I'm not talking about English classes, I mean basic crap they should've known by eighth grade. More than a few list one of the hard sciences as their prospective Major. Lacking a transcript, I'll presume that the village over in Somalia that raised Mohamed wasn't so into K-8 excellence.

Why was it necessary for the Feds to give this nut a fake bomb before they could arrest him? Sounds like the wanted a big, splashy media event before taking him, rather than quietly busting him for conspiracy.

Conspiracy to do what? Attend a treelighting ceremony?

Here, Muhamud took every step necessary to set off a bomb that would have killed dozens of people. Entrapment would be the only counterargument his defense attorneys would have.

It was ok back in 1979. Damn that Supreme Court! Smith v. Maryland, 442 U.S. 735, 744 (1979)

Yes, I know. It still didn't stop you people from going ape shit and screaming Booshhitler at the top of your shrill little lungs did it?

Why use the truth when spreading lies is so much more fun.

Yes, and Barack Obama has ordered the confiscation - without any due process mind you - of internet domain names and websites they claim assist in the distribution of copyrighted material.

Foot in the door to total control and shutting down of the internet. The internet is the thing that has enabled the "PEOPLE". We can communicate and spread information freely. The Obama Progressive Socialist agenda is threatened by this and it MUST be STOPPED according to their view.

"I wish we had a defense attorney who would comment on this. Or any attorney for that matter. Something like entrapment seems to have happened. Had the FBI not contacted him, and then given him a bomb, what would this Muslim have done without the direct involvment of federal authorities?"

The idea to do the bombing appears to have originated in his mind, not the FBIs, thus there is no entrapment. Not that it won't be argued by his defense attorneys.

"Why was it necessary for the Feds to give this nut a fake bomb before they could arrest him?"

Knowing the FBI (and I do), I am sure they didn't mind a "big splash" of headlines, but frankly, the best case possible would be to get the guy to plant the fake bomb and try to detonate it. Anything short of that and his defense attorneys would have been saying he was just joking the whole time or something.

Entrapment is a very difficult defense to successfully mount. It's not just a government offer or sting. You have to show the defendant was not predisposed toward the activity and/or the government conduct was such that it overhwhelmed him. Like the case where the Feds inundated a guy with offer for kiddie porn despite no evidence the guy was predisposed toward kiddie porn. Very simplistic explanation.

Here the guy showed a predisposition toward terror activity.

Replace terror activity with narcotics sales and drugs with bomb and it is a run of the mill FBI case. They have info a guy wants to get a large amount of drugs to sell and they use an undercover agent to set up a deal.

The entrapment statutes as written only apply to left wing plots. There have been some attempts in recent times to extend these rights to Islamic conspirators, but these attempts have not yet borne fruit. Right wing nut cases are, of course, specifically excluded from the entrapment statutes.

Our investigation shows that Mohamud was absolutely committed to carrying out an attack on a very grand scale.

Well, 5 drums of explosives pretty much define how "grand" your attack is going to be. If the FBI told him there was a small nuclear device, or chemical/biological agents in one of the drums, would the press release say "an attack on an apocalyptic scale"?

This demonstration, created by the FBI using this dumber-than-dirt kid, is perfect from a timing point of view (Christmas season), and also from the convenience factor of creating a needed boost in public opinion for Homeland Security.

Notwithstading his emails to jihadists, if he was already being monitored did Mohamud ever pose a real threat that he needed to be taken out this way? Or was this just theater for our holiday enjoyment? (Entrapment would certainly be one of the defense arguments when he goes to trial.)

Why was it necessary for the Feds to give this nut a fake bomb before they could arrest him? Sounds like the wanted a big, splashy media event before taking him, rather than quietly busting him for conspiracy.

Conspiracy to do what? Attend a treelighting ceremony?

Here, Muhamud took every step necessary to set off a bomb that would have killed dozens of people. Entrapment would be the only counterargument his defense attorneys would have.

Well, there's this from the article, "The FBI affidavit that outlined the investigation alleges that Mohamud planned the attack for months, at one point mailing bomb components to FBI operatives, whom he believed were assembling the device.

It said Mohamud was warned several times about the seriousness of his plan, that women and children could be killed, and that he could back out, but he told agents: 'Since I was 15 I thought about all this;' and 'It's gonna be a fireworks show ... a spectacular show.'".

Sounds like conspiracy to blow up something to me.

You seem awfully eager to make the Feds look good, and that's not usually your position. As I said above, as long as it makes The Zero look good, that's different...

PS As NewHam and DBQ have noted, the confiscation of URLs by ICE is a bigger issue and fls seems cool with that. Why not Justice, if it's a copyright thing? Even the Demos aren't going for that.

I think it's time to curtail immigration from Muslim countries. It's not like they have anything to offer us that we can't get from immigrants from less benighted quarters of the world. There are plenty of Muslim countries in the world; they should stay there.

I never saw that commercial. Short and hilarious. Did Volkswagon corporation actually make such a thing. Big businesses usually don't have the balls to go anti-P.C. like that. Great commercial.

I suppose it offends some, but why? As a white guy, I'd find it just as hilarious if it showed some white supremacist doing something similar that made sense factually like this does. I don't relate to evil bastards just because we might share ethnicity, race, or religion. I don't see why some Muslims do.

So total is the hold of PC that not a single significant politician of either party has called for a ban on immigration from the Islamic world. Why? Because to do so would be political death and relegation to the ranks of "haters."

FLS, it's an ex-Teacher's College, current HBCU, in North Carolinny. I would hope standards are higher at OSU, but I have no reason to think they are. Particularly with P.C. charity cases like the dipshit who just tried to kill scores of Americans. Those kids often jump to the head of the line.

We need to lock these people up and either deport them or only let them go if they pass a screening test that is very strict. I am not sure if any muslim can be loyal to this country at this point. It seems their religion always comes first.

Some words have also been deliberately edited out of this article by Associated Press senior editors:

MuslimIslam.....

You didn't get the Memo? It was those Paki Sikhs that turned him into a bad boy...

Chad said... It seems their religion always comes first.

Christians havethat "render unto Caesar" clause in their contracts. Mohamed got smart and swapped that out for "Allah Akbar"

Seriously though, it Sort of brings into question whether you can count on a devout Muslim when it comes to this Oath:

I (insert name), having been appointed a (insert rank) in the U.S. Army under the conditions indicated in this document, do accept such appointment and do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic, that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter, so help me God.

Well, in defense of Muslims, many Christians and Jews I know put religion first as well.

This young man put violence, threats of violence and ideological identification with certain Muslims first (and there certainly is a lot of sentiment in the Middle East for this kind of thinking). Morally he's very much in the wrong (he would likely disagree), and while led, he likely very much violated our laws.

We're still dancing around the incompatibility questions too:Are democracies, post-Enlightenment freedoms (including speech) and is Western Civ more broadly...incompatible with Islam?

The INS may seek denaturalization if the applicant made a false oral statement under oath (regardless of whether the testimony is material) with the subjective intent of obtaining immigration benefits. Alternatively, the INS may seek denaturalization if the applicant procured naturalization by concealment or willful misrepresentation of a material fact. In either case, the INS must prove its complaint by clear, unequivocal, and convincing evidence.

"The FBI thwarted an attempted terrorist bombing in Portland's Pioneer Courthouse Square before the city's annual tree-lighting Friday night, according to the U.S. Attorney's Office in Oregon. A Corvallis man . . ."

First sentence at The New York Times:

"Federal agents in a sting operation arrested a Somali-born teenager just as he tried blowing up a van he believed was loaded with explosives at a crowded Christmas tree lighting ceremony in Portland, authorities said."

It's Groundhog Day with bombs and Muslims. Pretending it's always a coincidence, or perpetually crying about a "tiny number of them", is neither smart nor productive. We need grown-ups in charge. Or at least some people willing to learn.

This may cause some problems law enforcement wise. He can't be locked up indefinitely like a non-citizen can. He can't be deported.

He can't even have his citizenship revoked.

Maybe we need to look into the naturalization process while we are about it.

John R Henry

1. The US can denaturalize aliens that took citizenship who lied in the process about their intent, or generally proved themselves undesirables afterwards.

2. All through the 20s and 30s the US was deporting Jewish radicals for subversive activities to Germany, Poland - as well as substantial numbers of Italians with ties to subversive organizations and/or organized crime. Of course, stripping a Jew of his citizenship and packing him off to Weimar Germany because he wanted to set off bombs proved not ideal for the Jewish communists long-term health...but he wasn't America's problem anymore.

3. THe ideal thing to do would be to strip Mohammed Osman Mahmoud of citizenship..then helo him and any "convicted in a court of august civilian US law" Somali crooks, terrorists, pirates - in anywhere in Somalia. Even if it is 500 miles into some other Somali Muslim tribes territory where non-tribal Muslims are killed if no infidels are around.

New Ham - if a nuke went off in Portland I can guarantee you the death penalty will be back with a vengeance on the next ballot and will pass 80-20. If the Oregan SCOTUS struck it down, then the people will impeach them for crimes against the people. It will be pitchfork, torches, tar & feather time. All bets are off.

I am very glad he was caught - yes, it does appear that the FBI had to do a lot of the heavy lifting in his bomb plot, but if it weren't for them, he might have eventually found a genuine competent bomb-maker to help him out, so kudos to the FBI.

At to McVeigh - why is he always cited as the epitome of white terrorism? Why not William Ayers, who is still a free man, while McVeigh has at least been removed from the human race. I mean, the only difference is that the high school-educated ex-enlisted man was a far more competent bomber than the future Professor of Education.

And I am sure we all recall the "profiling" of angry white males that went on under the Clinton Admin - how he and his mouthpieces used McVeigh to tar anyone of pallor who questioned the magnificent Federal Democrat machine? How about that "vast, right-wing conspiracy" that Ms. Clinton prattled on about. Hell, that crap hung around long enough to impeded the search of the Beltway Sniper, one Mr. Johan Alan Mohammad.

I mean, the only difference is that the high school-educated ex-enlisted man was a far more competent bomber than the future Professor of Education.

How does Ayers stack up against McVeigh?

McVeigh's blast killed 168 people,including 19 children under the age of 6,injured more than 680 people,destroyed or damaged 324 buildings,destroyed or burned 86 cars, and shattered glass in 258 nearby buildings,adding up to a total of $652 million worth of property damage.

New "Dumbshit" Ham says:If the Muslim terrorist had actually set off a nuclear device in Oregon, the maximum penalty under the law is ONLY life in prison.

Wrong. The Federal government has death penalty statutes also, including with respect to murder by use of weapons of mass destruction. So regardless of what the law is in Oregon, the death penalty would be on the table in such a circumstance.

William says: The entrapment statutes as written only apply to left wing plots. There have been some attempts in recent times to extend these rights to Islamic conspirators, but these attempts have not yet borne fruit. Right wing nut cases are, of course, specifically excluded from the entrapment statutes.

Wrong. The entrapment defense is available to defendants regardless of their ideology or religion. But I suspect you knew that already.

McVeigh's blast killed 168 people,including 19 children under the age of 6,injured more than 680 people,destroyed or damaged 324 buildings,destroyed or burned 86 cars, and shattered glass in 258 nearby buildings,adding up to a total of $652 million worth of property damage.

You're so right, fls, and I knew Bill Ayers and his former girl friend Diana Oughton, who was among 4 killed making a bomb in Greenwich Village that AYERS HIMSELF DESIGNED!!! I'll bet Bill doesn't lose any sleep over Diana, whose a lot prettier than former law student Bernardine, whom I've also met.

And Ayers killed a cop while bombing a Fed building. No comparison, except McVeigh was at least competent in his terrorist proclivities and was motivated by the worst AG the US has ever had before Holder, swamp thing Reno, who killed about 70 Branch Dravidians at Waco. Ayers was provoked by whom again?

You're certainly an apologist for domestic terrorists - such as Bill Ayers.

As anyone reviewing your comments can ascertain for themselves.

See, FLS, your comments indicate that you believe some terrorism is OK as long as the terrorist has the proper motive (i.e., any motive you yourself would agree with).

You think domestic terrorism is fine as long as it is advancing the liberal argument, and you think it's OK that your president is friends with a domestic terrorist and it's fairly plain for people to see that in your comments.

You will see no such words in the Associated Press report of this person's activities.

They've deliberately removed all references to why he wanted to bomb people, what jihad is, which mosque he attends, which form of Islam he worshiped, who his imam was, who his parents work for, how they got permission to come to this country, why they're raising terrorists, etc.

No effort to explain why he's trying to murder thousands of innocent people celebrating the birth of someone who is not Mohammed.

The Associated Press is not interested in the narrative of Muslim terrorism and refuses to report these facts.

"If we're going to profile terrorists, I still don't see how we can ignore the profile of the men who committed the second most destructive act of terrorism ever committed on US soil."

If we're going to profile terrorists, I don't see how we can ignore the profile of the woman who burned to death more babies in a single act of terrorism against a church in the history of the United States.

Surely we should not allow Democrat Attorneys General to escape scrutiny.

former law student said...If we're going to profile terrorists, I still don't see how we can ignore the profile of the men who committed the second most destructive act of terrorism ever committed on US soil.

that's just crap. Yes, McVey killed a fairly large number, but that was a pretty rare event. McVey would claim that Clinton/Reno killed more children at Waco than he did at OKC. But yes, he was a killer and deserved to die.

But the numbers of Muslim events or the death toll of 20 times OKC, combined with declarations of war against the US by some non-insignificant portion of a bilion people would seem to deserve the vast majority of resources.

how about we allocate based on deaths in the last 20 years. say 97% Muslims and 3% white Christian Vets with a grudge?

Or on events, and go 99% Muslims and 1% white Christian Vets with a grudge?

The only good thing about McVeigh is that he appears to have been a one-off. Yes, there have been other "militia" types who seem to court confrontation with Federal LEOs, but McVeigh's actions, and the death toll, especially the children, produced nothing but revulsion, even among those on the paranoid fringe who would seem to be his natural constituency. It is fair to say that McVeigh and Nichols are universally despised across the political spectrum.

But the thing that kills me is that Ayers plotted to bomb a dance filled with young soldiers, their dates and various staff and volunteers. Had he succeeded, he could have killed hundreds of young Americans. And yet, he can still appear in polite society - and you can still be his friend (and maybe ghostwriting client) and be elected elected President. I know that the FBI cut corners, and that's why Ayers is free to walk the streets - I accept that such is the price of maintaining our constitutional freedoms - but I cannot accept that he is not shunned and despised by every decent person. Instead, he is embraced by the left (Your left FLS), and at least tolerated by mainstream liberals, and is made a professor and is the subject of fawning magazine articles.

It is as if Eric Robert Rudolph was made a professor at SMU and given a seat on the board of the Koch foundation. Yes, exactly.

The left loves McVeigh because he is the only notable case of an arguably right of center mass murderer in a long long time. We never hear a peep about Stalin or Mao, not a sound. But McVeigh appears in every conceivable paragraph by apologists for Islamic terrorism trying desperately to promote equivalency. But, hey, I am suggesting we swap profiling every person named Tim or Timothy for every person named Muhamed or Mohamed.

McVeigh was one man, committing a terrorist act years ago. What we are facing now, and have been for quite a while, is a pattern of men from one religion continually trying to commit terrorism. Of course, you know what, you're just trying to be funny. Right?